From: William Lee Irwin III <wli@holomorphy.com>
To: Matthew Wilcox <willy@debian.org>
Cc: Marco Colombo <marco@esi.it>, Larry McVoy <lm@bitmover.com>,
kernel-janitor-discuss
<kernel-janitor-discuss@lists.sourceforge.net>,
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: BKL removal
Date: Wed, 10 Jul 2002 09:46:45 -0700 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20020710164645.GR25360@holomorphy.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20020710154003.Z27706@parcelfarce.linux.theplanet.co.uk>
On Wed, Jul 10, 2002 at 12:03:08PM +0200, Marco Colombo wrote:
>> Larry, there's something I've always wanted to ask you about your
>> idea of the "locking cliff": when you're counting the number of locks,
>> are you looking at the running image of an OS or at the source?
On Wed, Jul 10, 2002 at 03:40:03PM +0100, Matthew Wilcox wrote:
> Larry normally talks about the number of conceptual locks. So in order
> to manipulate a `struct file', it really doesn't matter whether you have
> to grab the BKL, the files_struct lock or the filp->lock. There's a big
> difference if you have to grab the filp->pos_lock, the filp->ra_lock and
> the filp->iobuf_lock. You'd have to know what order to grab them in,
> for a start.
This is called "lock depth" and is not related to the total number of
locks declared in the source. AFAIK no one wants to increase lock depth.
Cheers,
Bill
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2002-07-10 16:45 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 95+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
[not found] <Pine.LNX.4.44L.0207061306440.8346-100000@imladris.surriel.com>
[not found] ` <3D27390E.5060208@us.ibm.com>
2002-07-07 20:55 ` BKL removal Greg KH
2002-07-07 21:28 ` Oliver Neukum
2002-07-07 21:58 ` Dave Hansen
2002-07-07 22:38 ` Oliver Neukum
2002-07-07 21:35 ` Dave Hansen
2002-07-07 21:55 ` Thunder from the hill
2002-07-07 22:42 ` Dave Hansen
2002-07-07 23:07 ` Thunder from the hill
2002-07-07 23:23 ` Dave Hansen
2002-07-07 23:34 ` Thunder from the hill
2002-07-07 23:42 ` Sean Neakums
2002-07-07 23:31 ` Oliver Neukum
2002-07-07 23:45 ` Dave Hansen
2002-07-08 2:34 ` Matthew Wilcox
2002-07-08 2:52 ` Dave Hansen
2002-07-08 3:06 ` Alexander Viro
2002-07-08 12:33 ` Matthew Wilcox
2002-07-08 14:53 ` Dave Hansen
2002-07-08 12:29 ` Matthew Wilcox
2002-07-08 2:58 ` Alexander Viro
2002-07-08 3:06 ` Dave Hansen
2002-07-08 12:15 ` Matthew Wilcox
2002-07-08 6:34 ` Oliver Neukum
2002-07-07 23:23 ` Oliver Neukum
2002-07-07 23:31 ` Dave Hansen
2002-07-07 23:51 ` Greg KH
2002-07-08 0:07 ` Dave Hansen
2002-07-08 2:12 ` Greg KH
2002-07-09 1:46 ` Rick Lindsley
2002-07-09 4:38 ` Greg KH
2002-07-09 19:31 ` Rick Lindsley
2002-07-09 20:17 ` Greg KH
2002-07-09 20:55 ` Rick Lindsley
2002-07-09 21:00 ` William Lee Irwin III
2002-07-09 21:12 ` Robert Love
2002-07-09 14:19 ` Dave Hansen
2002-07-09 21:29 ` Robert Love
2002-07-09 14:44 ` Dave Hansen
2002-07-09 21:47 ` Robert Love
2002-07-10 1:15 ` Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo
2002-07-10 3:27 ` Alexander Viro
2002-07-09 20:49 ` Dave Hansen
2002-07-10 5:30 ` Alexander Viro
2002-07-10 10:28 ` Sandy Harris
2002-07-18 0:30 ` David Wagner
2002-07-18 1:03 ` Daniel Phillips
2002-07-09 21:59 ` William Lee Irwin III
2002-07-09 22:21 ` Alan Cox
2002-07-10 13:31 ` jlnance
2002-07-10 14:17 ` Alan Cox
2002-07-15 20:53 ` Alexander Hoogerhuis
2002-07-15 22:07 ` Rik van Riel
2002-07-15 22:25 ` Thunder from the hill
2002-07-09 19:33 ` Rick Lindsley
2002-07-09 20:12 ` Greg KH
2002-07-09 4:49 ` Drew P. Vogel
2002-07-09 5:25 ` Dave Hansen
2002-07-09 5:21 ` Larry McVoy
2002-07-09 7:59 ` Roman Zippel
2002-07-10 10:03 ` Marco Colombo
2002-07-10 14:40 ` Matthew Wilcox
2002-07-10 16:46 ` William Lee Irwin III [this message]
2002-07-11 9:57 ` Marco Colombo
2002-07-10 21:28 ` Rick Lindsley
2002-07-10 22:24 ` Daniel Phillips
2002-07-10 23:36 ` spinlock assertion macros Jesse Barnes
2002-07-11 0:54 ` Andreas Dilger
2002-07-11 1:10 ` Jesse Barnes
2002-07-11 5:31 ` Daniel Phillips
2002-07-11 7:19 ` george anzinger
2002-07-11 16:35 ` Oliver Xymoron
2002-07-11 23:52 ` Sandy Harris
2002-07-12 0:56 ` Daniel Phillips
2002-07-12 3:22 ` Oliver Xymoron
2002-07-11 18:03 ` Jesse Barnes
2002-07-11 19:17 ` Daniel Phillips
2002-07-12 12:07 ` Dave Jones
2002-07-12 12:55 ` Daniel Phillips
2002-07-12 19:24 ` Arnd Bergmann
2002-07-12 17:42 ` Daniel Phillips
2002-07-17 2:22 ` Jesse Barnes
2002-07-17 6:34 ` Daniel Phillips
2002-07-18 23:36 ` [PATCH] spinlock assertion macros for 2.5.26 Jesse Barnes
2002-07-17 11:09 ` spinlock assertion macros Arnd Bergmann
2002-07-12 20:41 ` Oliver Xymoron
2002-07-13 3:21 ` Daniel Phillips
2002-07-12 17:49 ` Robert Love
2002-07-12 17:58 ` Dave Jones
2002-07-11 10:51 ` Arnd Bergmann
2002-07-07 22:24 ` BKL removal Greg KH
2002-07-08 0:56 ` Bernd Eckenfels
2002-07-10 0:30 ` Pavel Machek
[not found] <0C01A29FBAE24448A792F5C68F5EA47D2B0C8A@nasdaq.ms.ensim.com>
2002-07-08 19:00 ` pmenage
2002-07-08 21:45 ` Oliver Neukum
2002-07-10 7:32 dan carpenter
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=20020710164645.GR25360@holomorphy.com \
--to=wli@holomorphy.com \
--cc=kernel-janitor-discuss@lists.sourceforge.net \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=lm@bitmover.com \
--cc=marco@esi.it \
--cc=willy@debian.org \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox